The invention relates to a method and system for communications of fuel data, including fuel depletion data, over a communications network.
The invention provides advantages over the prior art for the U.S. retail gas or service station industry. It's very big industry. The typical car- or truck-owning consumer might drive 24,000 miles a year. Given a fuel efficiency of 16 miles per gallon, then that's consumption like 1,500 gallons a year a person.
Assuming further an average purchase of 15 gallons every gas stop, our representative consumer here is making over one hundred stops a year. That's twice a week. Regardless of these assumptions, all of us are very familiar with the chore of gassing up our car (or truck) at a filling station.
Nowadays a gas stop generally means pulling over to a convenience store. Convenience stores offer fuel sales in combination with various other non-petroleum products. In many respects, convenience stores can be reckoned as miniaturized versions of grocery stores except having less variety of product at higher prices. Over the last decade gasoline has been selling down as low as $1.25 a gallon. At the same time, a convenience store might sell a sixteen ounce cup of coffee for $1.25. In equivalent terms, the coffee sells for $10.00 a gallon. Someone has quipped that, convenience stores give gas away in order to sell coffee. Generally, convenience stores sell all product other than the fuel at lucrative margins. Which is odd, because retailing fuel is a very sophisticated enterprise. It requires expensive on-site equipment, an expensively-equipped wholesale chain, and highly-skilled equipment vendors. In stark contrast, the store clerks (who are far more visible to the public) are nowhere nearly as skilled.
Despite all the sophistication in retail petroleum sales, new convenience stores are showing up everywhere these days, and selling fuel at such basement prices that the rest of the world must surely be envious.
FIG. 1 shows some technical aspects of the prior art way (indicated as 1501) of retailing fuel at such basement prices. More particularly, FIG. 1 shows a prior art way 1501 how a remote party 160 such as a fuel wholesaler (or transport company or dispatcher) might research the in-tank fuel levels among a distributed population of retail fuel stations 170, including for example convenience stores. Pause can be taken for a moment to consider some typical parties involved in retailing fuel to the public. For brevity's sake, consider the following three:—retailers, wholesalers, and equipment vendors. An example retailer is represented by the convenience store owner (or management). The equipment vendor is typically an equipment dealer, whose responsibilities likely include the original installation of (and then thereafter maintenance over) the bulk tanks as well as pumping and piping equipment that are on-site at the retailer's premise. The wholesaler is likely a transport company that owns a fuel depot as well as tanker trucks to dispatch to the various retailers in its service area in order to replenish them as needed.
At some original time, a convenience store site of the distributed population 170 undertakes a major construction project during which that one store gets installed with equipment comprising for example, bulk storage tanks (either in-ground or above-ground), pumps (ie., actual pumps, usually in-tank, and not what consumers refer to as ‘pumps’), pipelines, and dispensers (ie., these being what consumers refer to as ‘pumps’).
Given the foregoing, then a repetitive cycle gets underway. The wholesaler 160 dispatches a tanker truck to the convenience store to “stock” (eg., supply or fill) for the first time the bulk storage tanks. The convenience store sells its fuel supply until any one of its several bulk tanks near depletion. Under optimal circumstances, the/a tanker truck returns in a time frame between when the convenience store is low but not dry on a given grade or fuel-type (eg., different blends as well as diesel too for example and not just gasoline). That way, the tanker truck's delivery route can be optimized. In other words, just-in-time re-fueling is an optimized utilization of the tanker truck. Corresponding efficiencies are achieved for the convenience store if the/a tanker truck returns only as often as necessary. On a more infrequent basis still, the equipment vendor periodically visits the on-site equipment, to perform maintenance and the like, on either a schedule or only after called on an as needed basis.
As FIG. 1 shows, the in-tank fuel level of each given tank is measured and logged by an automated tank gauge (eg., “ATG”). Since none are illustrated, pause is taken for another moment to consider what these ATG's look like. An example and common prior art ATG is produced by Veeder-Root (again, none illustrated except diagrammatically). A Veeder-Root ATG (as representative of others) relies on a permanently-installed measuring stick disposed inside the bulk fuel tank. The measuring stick extends vertically between a base resting on the tank floor and a crown as high as the tank ceiling. The measuring stick carries instrumentation such as and without limitation upper and lower sliding floats.
The lower float is preferably lighter-than-water but sinks in fuel and hence floats on the fuel-water interface. The upper float is preferably lighter-than-fuel and hence floats on the air-fuel interface. Position sensors are incorporated in the stick and/or floats to provide signals corresponding to float position. These signals are communicated to a controller 170e=ATG. Hence float position in combination with temperature measurement allows some entity—either the attached ATG controller 170e=ATG or a remote computer—to correspond an in-tank fuel level with the float and temperature data. The controller 170e=ATG attached to the ATG includes a processor for executing data logging services including storing logged data on a local storage device, as well as executing services for communicating with other devices.
Now to turn to FIG. 1 in earnest, it shows a prior art way 1501 how a remote communications center 160 can remotely research in-tank fuel levels. The remote communications center 160 can be reckoned as a “central office,” like that administrated over or on behalf of a transport company. One of the earliest objects in the prior art has been to automate the process 1501 in order in particular to eliminate reliance on a store clerk.
Generally, the central communications office 160 is depicted as a polling computer 160e. This may simply be about any general-purpose computer including a personal computer. The polling computer 160e depicted in FIG. 1 is the visible part of the remote central office 160. The polling computer 160e is entrusted with the responsibility of monitoring the in-tank fuel levels of the population 170 of automated tank gauges in its service area. In the drawing, these are depicted as ATG #1, ATG #2 and so on, through ATG X. For practical reasons (to be explained more particularly below), X is preferred to be about no more than ten.
Typically, there is much preliminary work to do to get this scheme up and running. First thing is, of course, that each fuel tank has to be associated (eg., instrumented) with an ATG. Installing and certifying ATG's—in fact about most work in and around the bulk tanks, pumps, pipelines and dispensers—is work for experts only. Although, despite there being a high need for expertise, equipment vendors as an ordinary necessity for doing business generally posses the requisite expertise.
The circuitry of the ATG needs to have, not only the computer services of an on-board processor and storage medium but also, an on-board modem, or at least be connected to one (modem indicated at 171e). The modem 171e needs to be linked to a telephone line 172e from the public (ie., public-switched) telephone network 180. The polling computer 160e also needs a modem 161e and telephone line 162e as well. The polling computer 160e needs to be pre-programmed with all the identities of the population 170 over which it is responsible of controllers 170e=ATG for ATG #1 through ATG X. Also, the polling computer 160e needs a telephone number for each of ATG #1 through ATG X. Additionally, the polling computer 160e will need to have installed on it the particular communications software for the various ATG's under its responsibility in order to enable the polling computer 160e to poll (eg., think of this as “pull”) information from each particular ATG controller 170e=ATG (ie., no matter which manufacturer or polling software version of a given manufacturer). This polling software is proprietary to the ATG manufacturers. They value their proprietary software and charge license fees for the use of such.
Given the foregoing set-up, the polling sequence transpires as follows. The polling computer 160e places a phone call to ATG #1. If the site's phone line 172e is open, the modem 171e is expected to answer. Perhaps the phone line 172e is busy because the line 172e used to contact ATG #1 serves principally as the retail store's main if not only telephone line, and at that moment the store clerk is tying up the phone line (with a personal call?). Even if the polling computer 160e gets as far as the modem 171e, ATG #I's controller 170e=ATG might be midway in a data logging cycle of its own, and therefore is unavailable for polling communications. If for any of these or other reasons the polling computer 160e cannot successfully poll ATG #1, then the polling computer 160e incrementally advances through its cycle by proceeding onwards to ATG #2, and so on, through ATG X.
There are various shortcomings associated with the prior art polling technology. One is that, as a practical matter, a given polling computer 160e can only usefully poll a limited number of ATG's. For example, if a polling cycle for eight ATG's can be completed every half hour, a polling cycle for one hundred ATG's cannot be completed until after about six hours. Regardless if eight or a hundred, experience suggests that there is only likely to be about a 70-80% success rate. If the polling computer 160e polling a hundred sites, the cycle time of six hours for a success rate of only three-out-of-four of the ATG's provides data granularity that is far too coarse in terms of predicting just-in-time re-fueling. Hence one shortcoming is that the central office 160 must guard against over-burdening one polling computer 160e with too much responsibility over too many ATG's. A further shortcoming of the foregoing is that it is not possible to get a “snapshot” of the in-tank fuel levels at all sites of the population 170, as bracketed within any reasonably small frame of time. At any given instant the data for some of sites will be as stale as one, two, three or more cycle times. That is, even if the polling computer 160e is responsible for only eight ATG's, at every instant some data is as stale as thirty minutes. However, in other cases the data will be at least as stale as ninety minutes and approach as stale as nearly one-hundred-twenty minutes if there are just three successive busy signals for that given one ATG.
An additional shortcoming is that there is no standard way to keep time synchronized among all the controllers 170e=ATG of the population 170. Synchronized time is important so that local data logging functions take place across the population 170 on a synchronized schedule. The local clocks usually provided with ATG controllers 170e=ATG are unreliable. They are no better than the personal computer clocks of the day which for some reason are notoriously inaccurate. Experience has discovered many examples of a several hour drift over a few months. Whereas the polling computer 160e might accurately know the time it calls any given ATG, the polled data is time-stamped by the onboard clock of that ATG controller 170e=ATG which, as said, is unreliable.
A more troubling shortcoming involves expansion. FIG. 2 shows some of the expansion shortcomings that trouble the prior art. As previously said, the central office 160 is well-advised to guard against over-burdening one polling computer with responsibility over too many ATG's. Expanding the responsibility of one polling computer over too many ATG's overwhelms that polling computer. FIG. 2 shows a prior art way 1502+ of accomplishing expansion. In FIG. 2, the data-destination center 160 (eg., the central office) has expanded by adding a second and third polling computer 160e2 and 160e3 to share in the workload of the first 160e1.
A moment will be taken to describe the structure and set-up of this multi-tasking network 1502+ Again each polling computer may be as simple as about any general-purpose computer including a personal computer. The three polling computers are collectively responsible for monitoring the origin points of data:—namely, the in-tank fuel levels of automated tank gauges ATG #1, ATG #2, ATG #3, ATG #4 and so on, through ATG-X. In FIG. 2 it is assumed that X is greater (eg., much greater) than ten.
As was described in connection with FIG. 1, each fuel tank (not shown) needs to be associated with an ATG. The ATG has an attached controller 170e=ATG that either incorporates or is at least connected to a modem 171e. The modem 171e needs to be served by a telephone line 172e from the public telephone network 180. Each polling computer 160e1 through 160e3 needs a modem 161e too and a dedicated telephone line 162e.
However, in contrast to FIG. 1, what FIG. 2 shows is different is as follows. No single one polling computer is responsible for all of ATG's #1 through X. Instead, the workload is divided into thirds (ie., per capita). Assuming one hundred ATG's, the workload might be divided like this. That is, the first polling computer 160e1 is responsible for ATG #1 through ATG #33 (#33 not specifically indicated in the drawing), the second polling computer 160e2 is responsible for ATG #34 through ATG #66, and third polling computer 160e3 is responsible for ATG #67 through ATG-X (and, in accordance with the previous disclaimer, #'s 34, 66 and 67 are not specifically indicated in the drawing). Similar to FIG. 1, each polling computer needs to be pre-programmed with the identities of each of the ATG's it is solely responsible for. Also, each polling computer needs to be pre-programmed with the telephone number for each ATG under its responsibility. Additionally, each polling computer will need to be installed with the particular communications software necessary to enable that polling computer to poll information from each particular ATG under its responsibility (and again, this software is specific in terms of manufacturer and/or which version of polling-software of a given manufacturer).
Given that set-up, the polling sequence transpires as follows. The first polling computer 160e1 places a phone call to ATG #I. The second and third polling computers 160e2 and 160e3 are independently allowed to poll ATG #34 and ATG #67, respectively (and, in accordance with the previous disclaimers, site #'s 34 and 67 are not specifically indicated in the drawing). Provided that the dialed phone lines 172e aren't busy (or the dialed ATG is not personally occupied doing something else), the polling computers ‘poll’ the data (eg., which can be reckoned as ‘pulling’ the data) and then cycle through the ATG's under their responsibility in order to poll the rest of the data. Unlike FIG. 1 in which a single polling computer would require six hours to cycle through one hundred ATG's, in FIG. 2 presumptively the three polling computers can cycle through the one hundred ATG's in two hours:—ie., a third of the time. However, just like in FIG. 1, the polling success rate is not any better than what experience finds as about 70-80%.
In spite of the solutions provided by this prior art way of expanding the number computers responsible for polling a population 170 of ATG's, there are still shortcomings in it all. As was identified in connection with FIG. 1, it is still not possible to get a snapshot of the fuel levels at all sites 170. Any given instant finds the data for some sites as stale as one, two, three or more cycle times. Also, there is no standard way to keep time synchronized at the ATG controllers 170e=ATG at all sites so that local data logging functions take place on a synchronized schedule.
More problematical, expansion requires the central office 160 to acquire more hardware 160e2 and so on as well as acquire leasing of additional dedicated phone lines 162e for the outgoing phone calls. And needless to say, the expansion in hardware requires an increase in the time from technicians for maintenance and attention.
Another issue with the FIG. 2 arrangement is that, the proprietary ATG polling software should be network-aware. Ideally this should be accomplished by a client/server database solution. In terms of cost to the central office 160, this translates to a big jump in cost and not merely because of the incrementally higher-dollar price of the license fees for ATG-specific network-versions of the polling software, but also for the database engine. However, the three polling computers are not truly networked because of the independent assignment to each to tackle each's assigned task load. Consequently, the data polled by each polling computer is not easily assembled together in a unified report. Each polling computer writes reports that are based on just the data from its own sites. Hence this arrangement in FIG. 2 is not easily assembled to provide overall reports.
Given the foregoing, what is needed is a solution to the shortcomings of the prior art. More particularly, there is a need to provide snapshot of bulk tank fuel levels at intervals that allow accurate fuel usage trends for “lower-half of the tank” scheduling of deliveries. There is another need for retrieval of compliance data and backup of information for all sites. There is an additional need for alarm information for service call dispatching and fuel dispatching. There is an alternate need for automated compliance data retrieval and processing for E.P.A. compliance.
There are various other needs including more readily adapting the network in face of problems consequent from burgeoning expansion of the parties on the network.